Does a dictatorship that has outlawed freedom of the press have the standing to criticize the ‘journalistic ethics’ of American reporters? That is the question one must grapple with when reading through Beijing’s latest blistering attack against CNN host Jack Cafferty ‘and his ilk’ for referring to the Chinese regime as ‘goons and thugs’ and calling Chinese goods ‘junk.’ Paradoxically, now the Chinese authorities appear to be criticizing Washington Read the rest of this entry »

You know, people say they are stunned, shocked. On and on. A close personal friend of mine who is a lawyer in NYC responded to an e-mail I wrote asking for an opinion on Eliot Spitzer’s alleged dalliances like this, “A topic better discussed off-line.” No doubt. No doubt.

How many times do I have to write about how “rising star” is the kiss of death? About how expectations outgrow human nature, as does our fantastical desire for there to be a mortal we can call perfect?

The rising stars fall not because our expectations are too high or because they lack the ability to rise as high as we need them to or wish they will or think they can.

Rising stars fall because no one, no thing, can rise indefinitely. And the plateau or the fall or decline is all relative. But it is also inevitable. And people just refuse to remember this and adjust their hopes and expectations accordingly.

This doesn’t mean you can’t have hope or hope for hope or believe in hope. It only means that you shouldn’t walk around saying how shocked and betrayed you feel. You snowed yourself if you thought it wasn’t possible.

Rich Harwood writes about this in a similar way here in this piece about Spitzer, leaders and leadership.

On one level, Spitzer’s story is similar to that of many leaders in our society. We become infatuated with them, even begin to worship them, believe they can do no wrong, assigning them qualities and expectations that too often are not humanly possible to fulfill. Meantime, the leaders themselves, mere mortals, begin to believe they actually hold mythic powers, at times exercising them with abandonment and hubris, often leading to their own demise. All this reminds me of sundry fables about young wizards, who when they finally embrace their own individual power, fail to understand its true use, and especially its limitations.

On another level, the Spitzer saga makes me think about notions of “imperfection.” I often think that in our desire to ascribe mythic qualities to leaders, we forget — indeed, I think we actually seek to deny — the reality that we all, including our leaders, are imperfect. Thus when imperfections arise, we are ill-equipped to discern their true meaning to us. We want people to grovel or put forth false modesty when caught, or we want their heads. Room to gauge our failings gets squeezed out; we try to ignore the reality that human imperfection exists, until once more it is staring us right in the face and cannot be escaped.

Now, if Ohio Governor Ted Strickland were revealed to have used the Emperor’s Club, that would shock me. Because his personality and Spitzer’s could not be more different.

Frankly, Spitzer fits the profile of someone who did what he’s alleged to have done and got caught precisely.

Here are some experts on that, thrown in with some other commentary that has stood out to me:

Is he a sex addict?

Why does someone in such a visible and responsible position act in this way? Over the next few days you’ll hear plenty of psychologists, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals give their sage perspectives.

But for all intents and purposes, no one can know why Governor Spitzer acted as he did, except the governor himself. As a matter of fact, it is against my code of ethics to state what the governor’s problem might be.

That’s because the reason that people stray away from their marriages are complex. One person may use extramarital sex to get back at a partner, another to escape obligations, a third to experience a thrill.

Read the rest of this entry »

In the Search for Truth, book and magazine publishers are running into a few problems. Herewith two new trends in the reality business:

The continuing hoo-ha over the latest publishing fraud, the Valley girl who posed as a druggie gang member, brings up the question of where to draw the line between writers with vivid imaginations and out-and-out liars.

Truman Capote, who invented the non-fiction novel, was not always the most fact-checkable of journalists. He had a storyteller’s way with the truth. His writing and even his casual conversation abounded in astonishments, wondrous coincidences and weird juxtapositions.

But Capote was a novelist at heart, and his talent earned him some leeway as a fabulist in matters of little moment. In fact, the writing of “In Cold Blood” was, in part, a challenge he set himself to tell a journalistically pure story that would have the richness of his fiction. He knew the difference.

Today’s fake memoirists either don’t know or don’t care.

Read more.

In an era of fake memoirs, Esquire now gives us a new variation on masturbatory journalism–the fictional diary.

For “a conceivable chronicle of Heath Ledger’s final days,” the editors explain, “writer Lisa Taddeo visited the actor’s neighborhood, talked to the store owners and bartenders who may have seen him during his last week, and read as many accounts and rumors about the events surrounding his death as possible. She filled in the rest with her imagination. The result is what we call reported fiction.”

Read more.

What do Europeans think of American election campaign tactics? Judging by this op-ed from Austria’s Die Presse, they’re nothing like those that take place on the Old Continent. Eva Male writes, ‘Smear campaigns are time-honored traditions in U.S. election campaigns. The longer the campaign wares on and the more heated it becomes, the more mud candidates are going to throw at one another, occasionally actively egged-on by the media.’

By Eva Male

Translated By Behncke

February 27, 2008

Austria - Die Presse - Original Article (German)

Smear campaigns are time-honored traditions in U.S. election campaigns. But one must take care: They have been known to backfire.

The longer the campaign wares on and the more heated it becomes, the more mud candidates are going to throw at one another, occasionally actively egged-on by the media. That’s what we are currently experiencing in the United States, where former First Lady Hillary Clinton must fear for her campaign for the nomination after the next big primaries in Ohio and Texas.

Clinton accused her challenger Barack Obama of inexperience in foreign policy, by indirectly comparing him to incumbent President George W. Bush. The fact that her campaign team circulated photos of Obama wearing traditional African garb - taken during a visit to Kenya - is being evaluated as racist and divisive. Just a few weeks ago, Hillary’s attack dog Bill barked vigorously at Obama. Meanwhile, Republican candidate John McCain was charged on the front page of The New York Times with having an affair with a lobbyist.

Ruthless tactics like these happen in U.S. election campaigns all the time. But they can backfire and earn sympathy for the attacked candidate. Surveys show that voters, especially the young, reject negative campaigning.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of the U.S. election.

You read the headline right. The following missive at the end of this article is one woman’s set of thoughts, presumed, for now, to be from N.O.W.

I still can barely believe that this is a legitimate communique from NOW.
I am still waiting for The Onion to own up as the writer of this missive.
Either that, or this is an example of get-down dirty agitation
or ?

Here is the missive. One that is so extreme, it beggars belief.
Like I said, I am still waiting for confirmation and re-confirmation that this originated from NOW.

Uneven coverage of all candidates: check.
Women’s concerns about childbearing health and other issues of mothers and daughters, not always as prominently and aggressively pursued: check

But reading and listening for subtext, which is what I do for a living for the past 38 years, the rest of this letter, appears to my analytic eye and ear, to actually to be a diatribe against Kennedy and Kucinich, and against NOW, rather than a sticking up for Hillary.

If the origin of this letter is true, NOW has become The National Organization of One Woman, instead of Women, plural.

If the origin of this letter has not been attributed accurately and is instead a monkey-wrenching by some misguided fool who thinks they are ‘helping’ their non-Hillary candidate–or Hillary– that too will come to the surface.

Stay tuned.

The putative statement from NOW:

Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.

And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not “this” one). “They” are Howard Dean and Jim Dean (Yup! That’s Howard’s brother) who run DFA (that’s the group and list from the Dean campaign that we women helped start and grow). They are Alternet, Progressive Democrats of America, democrats.com, Kucinich lovers and all the other groups that take women’s money, say they’ll do feminist and women’s rights issues one of these days, and conveniently forget to mention women and children when they talk about poverty or human needs or America’s future or whatever.

____
h/t Shaun Mullen

My wife forwarded this email to me earlier today:

Barbara Walters of Television’s 20/20 did a story on gender roles in Kabul, Afghanistan several years before the Afghan conflict. She noted that women customarily walked five paces behind their husbands.

She recently returned to Kabul and observed that women still walk behind their husbands. From Ms. Walter’s vantage point, despite the overthrow of the oppressive Taliban regime, the women now seem to walk even further back behind their husbands and are happy to maintain the old custom.

Ms. Walters approached one of the Afghani women and asked, “Why do you now seem happy with the old custom that you once tried so desperately to change?”

The woman looked Ms. Walters straight in the eyes, and without hesitation, said, “Land Mines.”

MORAL OF THE STORY: BEHIND EVERY MAN IS A SMART WOMAN.

Controversy surrounding this famous film actress refuses to die. Here is the latest…

Marilyn Monroe may have been tricked into killing herself as part of a plot hatched with the knowledge of the former US attorney general, Robert Kennedy, according to a secret FBI file, says The Independent.

“The document, uncovered by an Australian film director, Philippe Mora, suggests Monroe was ‘induced’ to make a suicide attempt, in the belief she would be found in time, and her stomach pumped. Instead, it suggests, she was left to die by staff and friends, including the actor Peter Lawford, who was married to Kennedy’s sister, Patricia.

“The 36-year-old actress was found naked and face down on her bed on 5 August 1962, with a large quantity of barbiturates in her system. For 45 years conspiracy theorists have claimed that her death was not a simple suicide, with some linking it to alleged affairs with Kennedy and his brother, the then President, John F Kennedy.

“French-born Mora admits he is not sure what to make of the file. He asks: ‘Is all this the elaborate dirty tricks of Kennedy haters from decades ago, or are we getting closer to the historical truth?”

For more click here…

Swaraaj Chauhan forwarded me the following, inspiring story.

STORY NUMBER ONE

Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago. Capone wasn’t famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.

Capone had a lawyer nicknamed “Easy Eddie.” He was his lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie’s skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time. To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but also Eddie got special dividends.

For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block. Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him.

Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly.Eddie saw to it that his young son had the best of everything: clothes, cars and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object. And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even
tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.

Yet, with all his wealth and influence, there were two things he couldn’t give his son; he couldn’t pass on a good name and a good example. One day, Easy Eddie reached a difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify wrongs he had done. He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al “Scarface” Capone, clean up his tarnished name and offer his son some semblance of integrity. To do this, he would have to testify against The Mob, and he knew that the cost would be great.

Keep reading this >>